India examines the Galil ACE

According to a report on janes website, India began the final round of trials of the rifle that is expected to serve in the Indian Army. The deal will include 44,618 units and over 33 million rounds of ammunition. Among the competing guns are the Galil ACE, the Beretta and the Colt.
The Indian Army began the final round of confirmatory trials in support of its requirement for 44,618 close quarter battle (CQB) 5.56 mm carbines and 33.6 million rounds of ammunition on 9 June, defence industry officials told janes.The Beretta ARX-160, Colt M4, and Israel Weapon Industries (IWI) Galil Ace carbines will undergo a series of tests at army establishments and weapon-testing facilities until the end of July. These include weapon sights, furniture, and ammunition trials. The competing guns will also undergo a "mud test" to gauge their ability to operate in poor conditions, an evaluation all three failed during trials in 2012 in the Rajasthan desert and high-altitude regions.
The process of choosing the new rifle began after the Indian Army was not satisfied with the local weapon â€“the INSAS. This rifle was developed over a period of 15 years, as a cost of $1.16 billion (present value) by the DRDO (equivalent to the Israeli MAFAT) and the OFB â€“ which is an Indian union of weapon industries. In India there are about 39 ordnance factories supporting an army of 1.3 billion soldiers.

Some facts are wrong here and are purely self entered. The rifles mentioned above are close quarter rifles. And about 44,000 are needed. An army of 1.3 million require that many rifles, not only 44,000. People at the behest of guns merchant foul mouth the INSAS rifle. It is as good as any. It was extensively used during Kargil campaign. It's problems of 1990 that lubricating oils froze, at minus 50 centigrade resulting in non operation have been overcome long time back.

INSAS is a battle rifle where enemy is at 300 yards. Close quarter rifles are used for urban combat at 50 yards. Also if urban combatants carry rapid firing but highly inaccurate AK47 rifle, then you have to carry similar or better rifle to corner him. Battle or Assault rifles are accurate, fire when enemy is sighted and shoot to kill. In case of AK 47, it is hit and miss, but it definitely forces the others to duck. It empties the cartridge in a few seconds.

Indian Army will replace the INSAS some day but that day is not here yet. I have a feeling that they wish to switch back to 7.62 bore than 5.56 bore INSAS.

Some facts are wrong here and are purely self entered. The rifles mentioned above are close quarter rifles. And about 44,000 are needed. An army of 1.3 million require that many rifles, not only 44,000. People at the behest of guns merchant foul mouth the INSAS rifle. It is as good as any. It was extensively used during Kargil campaign. It's problems of 1990 that lubricating oils froze, at minus 50 centigrade resulting in non operation have been overcome long time back.

INSAS is a battle rifle where enemy is at 300 yards. Close quarter rifles are used for urban combat at 50 yards. Also if urban combatants carry rapid firing but highly inaccurate AK47 rifle, then you have to carry similar or better rifle to corner him. Battle or Assault rifles are accurate, fire when enemy is sighted and shoot to kill. In case of AK 47, it is hit and miss, but it definitely forces the others to duck. It empties the cartridge in a few seconds.

Indian Army will replace the INSAS some day but that day is not here yet. I have a feeling that they wish to switch back to 7.62 bore than 5.56 bore INSAS.

Click to expand...

Aks are not at all inaccurate as you are telling.Yes it will not yield the result of a 5.56 M4 or M16 but it could hit targets upto 150 mts with much precsion.
All it need is to use sustained fire.If you are going to fire as in expendables then even a M4 or HK will not hit the target.If that weapon is that much bad then MARCOS,or PARA wouldn't have sticked to it for decades even though desi made INSAS was readily available at their disposal.

As ALBY says above that AK47 is accurate at 150 yards. I thought it is higher. But if he is right then it is difficult to field this gun if the enemy carries 300 yards accuracy rifle. No wonder only Soviets now Russians, its sattelite states and all terrorist organization of the world carry it. The latter do not need accuracy. They shoot at short ranges to kill anybody. For that AK 47 is great. The other reason for its proliferation is, that at lower end of the price spectrum, it is fielded by more countries and given away some time free for political reasons than the pricy comparable rifles.

Indian Army is going for 44,000 of better rifles possibLy with multi caliber capability. A terrorist or in an urban warfare conditions, the newer rifles shoot near and far with high level of accuracy, hence kill the person carrying AK47 even if he is hiding behind a wall or a structure.

@ALBY, it is true, one does not have to be in the military to have knowledge about firearms. John Browning was not in the military.

I will have to agree with @Kunal Biswas, that AKMs get much less credit that they deserve. I have used WASR AKM on the range, and scored plenty of hits on the bulls-eye, at 70 feet. That is the best I have done. The worst, was shooting down the target cable. That was the first time I used the WASR. AKMs are actually quite accurate if used in the semi-auto mode, and at short distances.

Many people form an opinion about AKMs after reading online commentaries. I have realized how often they are off the mark.

I have used both firearm over various ranges at various terrains, You don`t have any close Idea how its like, In such you should not make such claims based on someone else experience which are different than you think it is ..

An excerpts from a guy who has fired 35000 rounds through his Ak gives some views about reasons for Ak's less accuracy compared to a M4

Accuracy

As we know, the AK-47 is not the most accurate weapon when compared to other assault rifles, such as the M4/AR-15, why is that and exactly how accurate is the AK. Iâ€™ve been shooting my AK-47 for around 7 years now and put over 35,000 rounds through it. The accuracy of the AK when I first took it out of the box was a steady 4.73 MOA rifle. Though over time, Iâ€™ve seen changes in its accuracy as I am now only capable of holding a 5.8 inch group at 100 yards. This is more than likely due to poor maintenance which I did intentionally to test reliability. When compared to the accuracy of the M4, this may seem bad to some, especially when a standard M4 can easily hold a 3 inch group at 100 yards.

Iâ€™d have to credit the AKâ€™s lack of accuracy to its â€œfunctioningâ€ and the projectiles ballistic coefficient. The AK-47 is made up of only a few â€œmovingâ€ parts. Though there are fewer parts, these parts are made up of large chunks of metal. Take the bolt for example once fired. The hunk of metal that unlocks and flies back once fired is pretty heavy when compared to the M4. As it rides the railing and slams to the back, the weapons harmonics are disturbed significantly, take a look at a few videos of the AK-47 fired in slow motion and note the amount of barrel whip. You may also find a decrease in accuracy due to the fact that the rifles hand guard is made up of wood. Wood has a notorious tendency to bend, tighten, and loosen under temperature changes. For example, in the summer time, the doors within your home may become harder to open and close because wood expands and shrinks when hot. This shrinking and expansion of the wood hand guard, though minuet, changes the harmonics of the barrel.

Another reason I believe the weapon lacks in accuracy is due to the projectiles harmonics. The 5.56 has a G7 ballistic coefficient of â‰ˆ0.304 while the 7.62Ã—39 (123 gr) has a coefficient of â‰ˆ0.275. Itâ€™s lack of its ability to overcome air resistance in flight is also another reason why the rifle is â€œless accurateâ€.

So the point is AK47 is reliable due the large moving parts which itself cause the in accuracy ,soviets doctrine was never "eek goli eek dushman "(one bullet for one enemy) like the IA so they sacrificed the accuracy for the sake of reliability but that doesn't make AK a bad rifle ,for 150-200 m it works well for a trained personnel. INSAS works well as an infantry rifle but lacks a multipurpose ability that might be covered by the DRDO's multi caliber weapon,hope-fully ..

I have used both firearm over various ranges at various terrains, You don`t have any close Idea how its like, In such you should not make such claims based on someone else experience which are different than you think it is ..

Click to expand...

Dude you had posted your opinion about different foreign military weapon systems ships ,air crafts missile and artillery systems etc in various threads .Iam pretty sure that all your opiniions were based on some ones else's experiences and you had never been near to most of those weapon systems .
So the same rule applies too you too....

According to the Russian press agency Interfax, the Israel Weapon Industries (IWI) launches a new factory in Vietnam to produce assault rifles Galil ACE 31 and ACE 32, to replace in the future all the Russian-made Kalashnikov AK-47 assault rifle in service with the Vietnamese army.

My Vote goes to IWI GALIL ACE and ARX 160. Galil ACE because of its ruggedness. ARX 160 because of its design.
More importantly hoping that the future production happens in india, and we get some technology transfer happens into india.